IRJET- Experimental Investigation on Bubble Deck Slab Confining High Density Polyethylene(HDPE) Spheres

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 03 | Mar 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2659
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION ON BUBBLE DECK SLAB CONFINING
HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE(HDPE) SPHERES
A.T. Saravana Sidharth1, K. Varsha2, S. Vasanth Kumar3, R. Vignesha,
Mr. A. Sattainathan Sharma5
1,2,3,4Engineering Student, Department of Civil Engineering, SRM Valliammai Engineering College,
Tamil Nadu, India
5Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, SRM Valliammai Engineering College, Tamil Nadu, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - Reinforced concrete is one of the common
materials used for construction. With the advent of new
techniques concrete could be modified to suit any need such
as early setting, high strength and such. But the inherent
property which comes with every material that exists is its
self-weight. Reinforced concrete even though versatile has
its drawbacks owning to its self-weight. Reducing self-
weight helps the structure to have better seismic efficiency
when constructed as multi-storey among other advantages.
The main objective of this project is to obtain a slab element
with reduced self-weight by means of confining High Density
Polyethylene spheres (HDPE). The Bubble deck slab casted is
then studied and compared with that of a conventional slab.
To find the most efficient sphere arrangement, two types of
Bubble deck slab was casted with zig-zag and uniform
arrangement along with a conventional slab. All the 3 slab
specimens were tested for load carrying capacity and the
results were compared. The amount of weight reduced is
also observed. Bubble Deck slab when opted for mass
construction not only reduces the weight of structure and
cost of construction but is also eco-friendly.
Key Words: Bubble Deck, HDPE Sphere, Self-weight,
Voided slab, Green technology.
1. INTRODUCTION
Bubble Deck Slabs are slabs in which the voids are
introduced by means of confining High Density
Polyethylene Spheres (HDPE). The confining of spheres are
based on the structure and need. The spheres are
introduced at the neutral axis of the slab and removes the
concrete that’s not performing any
crucial structural function.1kilogram of the polyethylene
sphere added removes up to 100 kilos of concrete in the
element. The slabs are designed as biaxial flat slabs. The
spheres are not placed at the edges of the slab where the
shear forces acting are more. About one third of the
thickness is reduced when spheres are introduced and thus
provides more head room and thus helps in construction of
many stories. The structure constructed thus has overall
less self-weight and thus the seismic performance of the
structure is also increased. The spheres also act in better
acoustic performance of the structure.
2. OBJECTIVE
i. The objective of this project is to cast a panel of
Bubble Deck Slab and study the structural behavior.
ii. To test and compare Bubble Deck slab of different
arrangement of spheres with conventional slab.
iii. To obtain a structural element with relatively Eco-
Friendly characters without compromising the
Structural integrity.
3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The project holds good scope in the future, as the
advent of skyscrapers demands much efficient structural
elements. Conventional concrete being the most desirable
construction material is being rendered undesirable with
the advent of increased skyscrapers and structures with
long span elements. Thus, there arises a need to not only
reduce the dead load of the concrete but also make it more
cost effective. These requirements are met by opting
Bubble Deck slab in place of conventional slabs
4. MATERIAL PROPERTIES:
a. MATERIAL SELECTION
The Raw materials used for casting of Bubble deck
and conventional slab are cement, water, Fine and coarse
aggregate. In addition to those materials High Density
Polyethylene spheres were used in the Bubble Deck Slab.
b. Cement:
Cement is the binding material that gives concrete
its strength and also binds all the ingredients in the mix
together. There are various types of cement available such
as Early setting time, High strength. Portland cement also
varies at grades namely as OPC 33, OPC 43, and OPC 53.
Since Bubble Deck slabs are adopted for mass
construction, OPC 53 grade is adopted to suit the strength
requirement and construction pace.

c. Fine and Coarse Aggregate:
Fine and Coarse aggregate gives the concrete its
cohesiveness, strength and toughness. The fine aggregate
used for concreting is River sand. Coarse aggregate chosen
is of size less than 20mm.The size of coarse aggregate
d. Water:
The water opted for concreting must be free from
any impurities and chemicals. Potable water is best suited
for concreting. Even though the spheres themselves are
resistant to chemical attacks and are of high density,
presence of harmful chemicals might reduce the efficiency
of the spheres.
e. Steel Reinforcement:
High grade steel of Fe 500 is generally used. The
same grade of steel is used in both in top and bottom steel
reinforcement. Here 12mm diameter steel bar is used for
main reinforcement and distributor reinforcement.
f. High Density Polyethylene Spheres (HDPE):
The spheres used for the formation of voids in the
Bubble deck slab must be of High Density so that it is able
to withstand not only the weight of the concrete but also
the loads acting thereafter. Spheres with density in the
range of 10kN/m3 is generally adopted. The spheres must
also possess high thermal resistance so that any accidental
fire will not damage the element. The spheres adopted
thus should have a fire resistance of at least 450 Degree
Celsius. They should also be inert to chemical reactions so
that they won’t be compromised in case they are exposed
to any chemicals. The spheres must also be made from
recycled plastic to not only reduce cost of manufacturing
but also to produce more eco-friendly product.
Table-1: HDPE Ball Properties
PROPERTY RANGE
Diameter 60mm
Density 10kN/ m3
Melting point 127-137°C
Ignition temperature >355°C
5. TEST ON MATERIALS
Test are conducted with reference with IS 12269:2013
Table-2: Test on Cement
CEMENT (OPC 53GRADE)
Test
Conducted
Attaine
d Value
Allowabl
e Value
Purpose
Specific
gravity
3.14 3.1-3.2 Used to find
whether the
material able to
float or sink.
Initial
setting time
28
minutes
30
minutes
To understand
the time, cement
takes for initial
setting between
mixing,
transporting
and placing of
concrete.
Consistency 31% 26%
-
33%
To find out the
water content
required to
produce Cement
Paste
Fineness 3% 3%
-
6%
It is responsible
for quick
development of
Strength and
Greater
Cohesiveness
Table-3: Test on Coarse Aggregate
COARSE AGGREGATE(<20mm)
Test
performed
Attained
Value
Allow
able
Value
Purpose
Specific
Gravity
2.7 2.6
-
3
Used to find
whether the
material able
to float or
sink.
Water
Absorption
1.5% Up to
3%
Used to
determine
the water
holding
capacity .
Crushing
strength
6.8% Not
greate
r than
30%
To measure
the
resistance of
an aggregate
under
gradually
applied
compressive
load

Table-4: Test on Fine Aggregate
FINE AGGREGATE(<20MM)
Test
Performed
Attained
Value
IS
Limit
Purpose
Specific
Gravity
2.6 2.3
–
2.7
Used to find
whether the
material able
to float or
sink.
Sieve
Analysis
Zone I --- To assess the
particle size
distribution.
6. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
6.1 General outline of experimental investigation
The investigation is done to study and compare the self -
weight, load carrying capacity and strain variation of
Bubble Deck slab with that of conventional Slab. Also to
arrive cost effective arrangement of spheres in slab
6.2 Mix design
Mix design was done for M40 grade concrete using IS
10262: 2009 for true slump and water cement ratio 0.40.
Quantity of materials as per M40 mix design is given in
table 5.
Table-5: Quantity of materials per m3
Material Quantity
Cement 551.2 Kg
Fine Aggregate 597.29 Kg
Coarse Aggregate 974.52 Kg
Weight of Water 220.48 Kg
Water Cement Ratio 0.4
Cement : FA : CA 1: 1.1 : 1.18
6.3 Test on Fresh Concrete
Test on fresh concrete are conducted to check the
workability. Workability of concrete is the property of
freshly mixed concrete which determines the ease and
homogeneity with which it can be mixed, placed,
consolidated and finished without segregation and
bleeding.
Slump Cone Test:
Purpose - Used to measure the Consistency of concrete
Table-6: Result of Slump cone test
S.NO W/C ratio
Slump
Pattern
1 0.40 True Slump
2 0.45 True Slump
COMPACTION FACTOR TEST:
Purpose - Used to measure the workability of concrete.
Table-7: Result of Compaction factor test
S.NO. W/C
ratio
W1
(kg)
W2
(kg)
Compaction
factor
(W1/W2)
1 0.4 14.864 17.895 0.83
Where W1 – Weight of partially compacted concrete.
W2 – Weight of fully compacted concrete.
Table-8: Slab Specification
S.no
specimen
Length
(mm)
Width(mm)
Thickness(mm)
(mm
Bubble
diameter(mm)
Arrangement
Grade
1 C.S 100
0
1000 130 - -
M402 BD-Z 100
0
1000 130 60
Zig-Zag
3 BD-U 100
0
1000 130 60
Uniform
Where C.S - Conventional Slab
BD-Z - Bubble Deck Zig Zag Arrangement
BD-U - Bubble Deck Uniform Arrangement
7. CASTING OF SPECIMEN
7.1 Design of Reinforcement
1) Detailing of Conventional Slab: Reinforcement was
designed based on IS:456(2000) as 12mm diameter bars
with a spacing of 100mm c/c in both x and y direction.

Cover of 35mm was given on each side. The main bars
were placed in the form of a mesh as shown in figure 1.
Fig - 1: Reinforcement details of Conventional Slab
2) Detailing of Bubble Deck Slab- Zig-Zag:
Reinforcement was designed as 12mm diameter bars with
a spacing of 80mm c/c in x direction and 60 mm c/c in y
direction. Cover of 35mm was given on each side. The
HDPE balls were arranged in Zig – Zag manner which was
shown in figure 2.
Fig - 2: Reinforcement details of Bubble Deck Slab
3) Detailing of Bubble Deck Slab- Uniform:
Reinforcement was designed as12mm diameter bars with
a spacing of 80mm c/c in x direction and 60 mm c/c in y
direction. Cover of 35mm was given on each side. The
HDPE balls were arranged in Uniform manner which was
in figure 3.
Fig - 3: Reinforcement details of Bubble Deck Slab
a. 7.2 Concreting and Curing of Specimens
The slab specimens were casted with a concrete
grade of M40. Weigh batching was adopted and hand
mixing was adopted for concreting. The casted specimens
were cured using jute bags for a period of 28days.
Fig - 4: Concreating
Fig - 5: Demoulding
Fig - 6: Curing of Specimens

8. TESTING OF SPECIMENS
The casted specimens were cured for a period of
28 days and then testing was done. The testing was
carried out by applying load. Deflection gauge was also
used to find the deflection produced on the specimen.
Fig - 7: Test Setup- CS
Fig - 8: Test Setup- BD-Z
Fig - 9: Test Setup- BD-U
From the test, the load at initial crack, ultimate load
capacity and the corresponding deflection was found out
for each slab. The crack pattern was also observed under
the ultimate load capacity of each slab.
9. TEST RESULTS:
Table-9: Test results
S.no
o
Slab Load at
Initial
Crack(kN)
Ultimate
load(kN)
Deflection
(mm)
1. C.S 180 192 3.78
2. BD-Z 156 164 3.88
3. BD-U 128 140 5.50
10. CRACK PATTERN:
Figures 10, 11 and 12 illustrates the specimen’s crack
patterns and failure mode under ultimate load. All
specimens showed flexural failure mode with diagonal
flexural cracks. Some small longitudinal cracks appeared
in uniform arrangement and Zig-Zag arrangement
specimens. This may be due to relatively thin bottom
cover thickness between bottoms of slab to bottom of
void. As the thin part of the bottom cover concrete under
the void was detached from the plastic sphere, small
longitudinal crack occurred.
Fig - 10: Crack pattern on conventional slab
Fig - 11: Crack pattern on uniform arrangement

Fig - 12: Crack pattern on zig-zag arrangement
11. GRAPH INTERPRETATION
Chart – 1: Stress vs Strain
The above stress strain graph is plotted for the hardened
concrete of grade M40, and it could be observed that the
graph pattern obtained is almost linear. It is produced by
plotting concrete compression strain at various intervals
of compression loading (stress). The stress and strain of
concrete is obtained by testing concrete cylinder specimen
at age of 28 days, using UTM (Universal Testing Machine).
Chart – 2: Load vs deflection (CS vs BD U)
The deflection of the uniform arrangement is much higher
at 5.50mm and the load capacity is also comparatively less.
The moment deflection curve is also shown.
Chart – 3: Load vs deflection (CS vs BD Z)
The deflection of zig-zag arrangement is 3.88mm which is
much lesser and the load capacity is also much higher. The
moment deflection curve is also shown. From the graphs
plotted it could be inferred that both uniform and zig-zag
arrangement of sphere has more deflection in comparison
with the conventional slab. Also the ultimate load capacity
is reached far earlier for uniform arrangement of sphere
than zig-zag arrangement.
12. STIFFNESS MODIFICATION FACTOR. (Dr. K.
B. Parikh (2014).
The second moment of inertia is a key variable when
performing structural analysis of slab. The un-racked
moment of inertia is dependent on the thickness and
width of the flat plate slab and the contribution made by
steel can be ignored since steel is not taking part prior to
cracking. In addition, the values in Cobiax Technology
Handbook are taken by calculating second moment of
inertia in State-1 (uncracked) and in State-2 (cracked).
The results have revealed that the stiffness reduction
factor in state-1 is the determining factor. The stiffness
reduction factor can be derived from the calculation of
second moment of inertia of voided slab and solid slab.
With the help of this reduction factor and taking into
account the reduced self-weight of voided slab deflection
of voided slab can be calculated
Fig - 13: Voided slab stiffness calculation method
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014
Stress(N/mm2)
Strain
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Load(kN)
Deflection(mm)
Load Vs Deflection
CS
BD U
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Load(kN)
Deflection(mm)
Load Vs Deflection
CS
BD Z

To find out stiffness reduction factor first find out second
moment of inertia of conventional slab without void
former. And this can be calculated with:
Ic = bh
3
/12
Where, b = Width of conventional section surrounding a
single sphere. h = Total thickness of the slab Second
moment of inertia of circle can find out with following
equation by considering average void area with radius r.
Iv = πr
4
/4 stiffness reduction factor is given by (Is –
Iv)/Is
The stiffness reduction factor for the Bubble Deck Slab
with Zig-Zag arrangement is calculated and was found as
0.98 which is within the permissible limits and hence the
slab type could be adopted for construction.
13. CONCLUSIONS
The Key conclusions inferred are as follows:
 From the test results obtained, it is found that both
the zig-zag arrangement and uniform arrangement
of spheres reduce considerable amount of self-
weight of the structure. The former reduces the
self-weight by about 4.2%, while the latter reduces
the self-weight by about 6.5% in comparison with
that of a conventional slab.
 The Load capacity of the slab with zig-zag
arrangement is about 85% of that of a conventional
slab while the Uniform arrangement of spheres
yields a load capacity of about 73% of the
conventional slab.
 The deflection characteristic which were observed
with a deflection gauge was that, it was higher for
uniform arrangement of spheres when compared
with both zig-zag arrangement of spheres and
conventional slab.
 Even though both zig-zag and uniform arrangement
of sphere yields a considerably reduction in self
weight and cost, the load capacity of the uniform
arrangement is much lesser than desirable value.
The deflection produced is also more owning to the
more number of spheres and the amount of
concrete removed. Thus considering these, it
becomes a difficulty to adopt this type of
arrangement for structure of large scale.
 Thus it could be concluded that, slab with zig-zag
arrangement of spheres could be adopted to obtain
the desirable advantages without compromising the
structural integrity. The slab type adopted is also
eco-friendly.
REFERENCES
[1] Amer M. Ibrahim, Nazar K. Ali, Wissam D.
Salman,“Fluxural capacity of reinforced concrete
spherical two -way bubble deck slabs of plastic
voids”, Diyala Journal of Engineering Sciences,
June 2013.
[2] Aratishetkar and NageshHanche,”Experimental
analysis of bubble-deck slab using modified
elliptical balls”, Indian Journal science Research
March 2015.
[3] Neeraj Tiwari Sana Zafar, Structural Behavior of
Bubble Deck Slabs and Its Application: Main Paper
IJSRD - International Journal for Scientific
Research & Development 2016.
[4] Prakash.A.N “ The revolutionary concept in voided
slabs”, Dimensions - A Journal of A N Prakash
CPMC Pvt. Ltd,March 2015.
[5] Suryawanshi.Y.R. and Bhagyashri.G.Bhade
“Structural behavior on Two way bubble deck slab
using hollow spherical balls”,VJER, June 2017.
[6] Mr.Muhammad Shafiq Mushfiq, PG Student,
Asst.Prof.ShikhaSaini and Asst.Prof.Nishant
Rajoria “Experimental Study On Bubble Deck
Slab” ,IRJET, MAY 2017.
[7] IS - 10262 (2009): Guidelines for concrete mix
design proportioning

IRJET- Experimental Investigation on Bubble Deck Slab Confining High Density Polyethylene(HDPE) Spheres

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to IRJET- Experimental Investigation on Bubble Deck Slab Confining High Density Polyethylene(HDPE) Spheres

Similar to IRJET- Experimental Investigation on Bubble Deck Slab Confining High Density Polyethylene(HDPE) Spheres (20)

More from IRJET Journal

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Experimental Investigation on Bubble Deck Slab Confining High Density Polyethylene(HDPE) Spheres